Like a bombastic King Midas, everything Donald Trump touches in this presidential election season turns into solid gold controversies. This week he turned his magical powers on the nation's 21 million veterans, leveraging the community as political pawns in his pissing match with Roger Ailes and FOX News, the media host of the January 28 Republican presidential primary debate.
Unable to bend FOX News to meet his demands, he announced that he would not participate in the debate. Not to be upstaged--though that clearly was impossible—Super PACs supporting Ted Cruz and Carly Fiorina put loaded guns full of dollars to the heads of the veterans, announcing that if Trump debated their preferred candidates, they would donate $1.5-$2 million to veterans groups. But no debate equaled no money for veterans.
.@realDonaldTrump: debate #TedCruz one-on-one in Iowa before the caucuses and we will donate $1.5M to vet charities #iacaucus #greatdeal
Upping the ante, I'm free tomorrow at 8pm, @realDonaldTrump. My campaign will give $2mm to veterans' cause to debate at Drake U. (2/2)
Instead, leveraging his immense power as the Republican Party's agenda-setter du jour, Trump announced that he would hold a rally and fundraiser for veterans instead of participating in the debate, turning the day into a referendum on veterans. Support Trump and support veterans. What could go wrong?
Trump showed why he is a formidable political force, throwing together on 48 hours notice a competing rally and launching the DonaldTrumpForVets website (adorned with cheesy stock photos and not much else) and asked Americans to donate to his personal 501c3, the Donald J. Trump Foundation, which would in turn distribute monies to deserving--but unnamed--veterans groups.
A number of groups were quick to jump out front and announce that they either would not touch Trump money or were not comfortable with how he was handling the issue.
Media and critics of his campaign called for him to announce more details: which veterans groups was he supporting? Why couldn't money go directly to them to save on overhead? A review of his Foundation's past giving showed limited support of veterans initiatives, reinforcing the belief that veterans were being used as his opportunistic political playthings.
When the dust from Trump's fundraiser had settled, Trump claimed to have raised $6 million, including $1 million from his own pockets and over $620,000 online, and released a list of 22 veterans groups who would benefit from his largesse. The list did contain a number of small groups with no national reputation, but it also surprisingly included several well-respected national groups, including Disabled American Veterans (DAV), the Fisher House Foundation and Operation Homefront. Immediately after the announcement was made, DAV issued a defensive statement reiterating its nonpartisan nature and intent to use the funds to support veterans directly.
Assessing the fundraising efforts, Daily Beast reporter and Trump expert Olivia Nuzzi, in a series of tweets, noted that it is possible that the Trump foundation will never be transparent about its promises to support veterans.
So 22 groups—one has to wonder if the number of beneficiaries was itself an attempt to play off the oft-misconstrued 22 veteran suicides per day estimate--will get some amount of money. They win. Yet in the larger sense, veterans lost yesterday. Trump and his fellow candidates seized veterans as campaign hostages and stoked political controversies in an area that benefits most from sober analysis and cooperative problem-solving. Organizations that end up accepting Trump Foundation money will be looked askance by Trump critics and face rebukes from other supporters, even if the money ultimately goes to good causes.
Of course, veterans were once again portrayed as victims in this clash. Politicians used to fight over each other to be pictured kissing adorable babies. Now they clash and clamor to be portrayed as the heroic champion of the downtrodden veteran. Babies don't like being harassed by politicians, that's obviously why they cry so much. Yet veterans certainly don't feel much better about being props.
There is no nuance in how Trump or the other candidates speak about veterans. Very little time is being spent discussing the actual needs of veterans, or considering the costs of advocating for military efforts that will result in new veterans with new physical, mental and moral injuries. Only when a candidate needs to throw some red meat out do veterans suddenly show up on the radar.
It's fitting that a man named Trump has proven to be such an irresistible force that he literally cannot be "trumped" on any stage. Yet it's tragic that he and the other candidates have decided to make veterans one of the signature pawns of the campaign. While there may be short-term benefits from having Trump's largesse directed toward you--many veterans groups are not in a position to say no to a sizable donation--the long-term result will be to solidify even further the veteran community's status as juicy political pawns, long in style and short in substance.
Share This Article
